I'll start off by agreeing with you on your point, regarding my use of the term 'karate man'. What I meant, and should have qualified afterwards, was that I don't beleive that someone trained in tradional (meaning without resistent sparring, as most uber-tradional dojo's do not) karate would defeat a professional boxer. Actually, I think there are many karate systems out there that train very good fighters.

Bringing this back to the original post, what got my back up intially was this:Neko said:

Quote:My answer [as to why karate is better than boxing] is because eye gouges, rigdehands to the the groins or ear slaps are illegal.

My argument here is that reliance on these types of techniques, imo, is exactly what detracts from the development of a funtional fighter. What makes a good karate fighter is the introduction of resistive sparring, not the amount of hand formations he knows. The problem with these techniques, as has been said many times, is that they cannot be trained in an alive manner. Therefore, the result of these techniques on an opponent is always a hypothetical. Over training of these kinds of techniques, especially believing that they are what makes a system better than another, leads, from my experiance, to a kind of festishizing of violence. One becomes more and more invested in the hypothetical/theoritical, and forgets what real violence looks like, and how hard it can be to stop someone set on doing you severe damage.

The antidote to this kind of thinking is consistent limited rules sparring. In effect, what makes someones karate funtional is not the technique acquisition, but rather the method by which those techniques are trained. Limited rules sparring is a new component to karate systems, from my understanding. Many of the more tradional dojo's in Okinawa still frown in this type of thing. Those karate orgization's which have embraced it generally produce the most capable fighters. These fighters are not only fuctional in the ring. The skill set transfers easily into a street scenerio.

I do, however, question the need of the preamble to this type of training that is a hallmark of many dojo's. I just don't understand why someone needs to spend two years before they can test what they have learned. I have yet to hear what I would consider a valid reason for this. Some say it is because the techniques are complicated, and take awhile to sink in. However, those techniques which are the most complicated are often not used in sparring anyway, because of the adrenline dump and so on. It is unlikely that they would be used on the street either. As for those techniques which cannot be trained in sparring, I think that there are too many variables going on to know for sure whether or not they work. Something as simple as knowing the proper depth of, say, an ear slap can win a fight or put you in the hospital, or worse. Unfortunately, one cannot know the proper depth of strike it takes to rupture the inner ear until one has done so. The early UFC's proved that these techniques are not the fight enders they once were thought to be.

So my point is that, yes, karate can be functional. But that is assuming that resistent sparring is involved, not whether or not ear/groin slaps and eye gounges are taught. I would argue that a karateka does not begin to have functional ability until resitent sparring is begun.

On the other hand, boxers learn this type of thing very early in their training. After that 'dirty' techniques can be shown (and most decent, authentic boxing gyms will show you these techniques for self defence purposes). However, they are always a subset of techniques, with those techniques that can be used in an alive manner taking precedence in the training. From my perspective, this is just a more functional way to train for striking ability (which is that topic that started this thread).

It's just a matter of percentages here. The boxer spends more time developing the delivery system to put his skill (techniques) into play. Most karateka (outside of those in knockdown systems) don't begin the development of this functional delivery system until years into their training. What we are talking about here, I assume when we say 'the best strikers', is the one's who can deliver the most strikes, the most times in the least amount of training time. The longer it takes to train the ability to deliver functional strikes, the longer it will take to develop a functional striker who can actually use his or her techniques. This is why I think, as a general rule, boxing is indeed a better system for training striking.

--Chris

Edited by Ames (11/09/0802:14 AM)

_________________________
"Seek not to follow in the footsteps of the men of old; seek what they sought."--Basho

Quote:My answer [as to why karate is better than boxing] is because eye gouges, rigdehands to the the groins or ear slaps are illegal.

My argument here is that reliance on these types of techniques, imo, is exactly what detracts from the development of a funtional fighter. What makes a good karate fighter is the introduction of resistive sparring, not the amount of hand formations he knows. The problem with these techniques, as has been said many times, is that they cannot be trained in an alive manner. Therefore, the result of these techniques on an opponent is always a hypothetical. Over training of these kinds of techniques, especially believing that they are what makes a system better than another, leads, from my experiance, to a kind of festishizing of violence. One becomes more and more invested in the hypothetical/theoritical, and forgets what real violence looks like, and how hard it can be to stop someone set on doing you severe damage.

You are correct in a sens that these 'targets' and the techniques used should not be considered the ultimate fight enders but they create great openers. Kicking the groin followed by smacking into face/nose. Or grabbing testicles combined with head-but and knee usually are good self defense techniques. You train first without resistance next oartner blocks individual techniques or into padding. Even boxers aim for certain specific areas (neck, liver, stomach, eye-brow, side of the head). Karate includes eyes, throath, collar bone, ...) But you are right not to rely on just one technique into such an area. I grant full-contact sports their filosophy not to rely on just one good hit but to continue combinations. Karate , in my view, does the same.

Quote:

The antidote to this kind of thinking is consistent limited rules sparring. In effect, what makes someones karate funtional is not the technique acquisition, but rather the method by which those techniques are trained. Limited rules sparring is a new component to karate systems, from my understanding. Many of the more tradional dojo's in Okinawa still frown in this type of thing. Those karate orgization's which have embraced it generally produce the most capable fighters. These fighters are not only fuctional in the ring. The skill set transfers easily into a street scenerio.

Limited rules sparring exists in my opinion since day one in the karate I train. Just depends with whom you're training. I am training since 1980. But control is a must to minimize injuries. We use minimal protective gear. I usually did not use protective gear. Grant you that due to ippon shobu or sanbon shobu or wkf shobu competition system many focus on getting the point. But that is competition fighting with rules. In free sparing (jiyu kumite) combinations are encouraged, at least where I train. But I encourage this type of fighting only to adults. I encourage youngsters (up to 25 years old) to focus on competition fighting. But as of +16, they are allowed to train witn the adults, where there is no competition mindset.

Quote:

I do, however, question the need of the preamble to this type of training that is a hallmark of many dojo's. I just don't understand why someone needs to spend two years before they can test what they have learned. I have yet to hear what I would consider a valid reason for this. Some say it is because the techniques are complicated, and take awhile to sink in. However, those techniques which are the most complicated are often not used in sparring anyway, because of the adrenline dump and so on. It is unlikely that they would be used on the street either. As for those techniques which cannot be trained in sparring, I think that there are too many variables going on to know for sure whether or not they work. Something as simple as knowing the proper depth of, say, an ear slap can win a fight or put you in the hospital, or worse. Unfortunately, one cannot know the proper depth of strike it takes to rupture the inner ear until one has done so. The early UFC's proved that these techniques are not the fight enders they once were thought to be.

I have been introduced into sparring from day one. Anybody training in our ojo is introduced to sparring from day one. But for kids(-12 years) and adolescent(12-25 years) I encourage competition fighting , shobu WKF rules).

Our dojo (my trainer) started in kyukushinkai. He till has fond memories fo training seminars with Mas Oyama en John Bluming. By the time I started training we were IOGKF, nowadays JKF Goju-Kai - Uchiage-Kai; Jiyu kumite from day one. Most dojo I know in Europe in whatever style did and do practice jiyu kumite (or free sparring). It was introduced by Gogen Yamaguchi around 1940. But even then on Okinawa they were experimenting with free sparring (eg bogu kumite and use of protective gear). But emphesisis in karate is to examine kata and the application of kata techniques. Bunkai is just a little piece of this. Eventually training in free form is a development in karate from around WWII. But in all, when I trained muay thai, we only free sparred for about 15 mins per training of 1,5 hr. The rest was conditioning, and partner drills.In karate, at our dojo, ususally last 15-20 mins is sparring. Especially with youth. Adults center more on conditioning (with contact) and partner drills.

Quote:I come from a long tradition of actually using my blocks and other interceptions in sparring. Needless to say, unless you practise some of the basic drills to which you’ve referred, you won’t be able to implement these techniques.

This shows some deflection/interception. This isn’t even representative; it’s just all that I had on video of sparring. That article explains our approach to sparring – going from soft and slow (where you get a chance to actually implement the bunkai you’ve learned) to hard and fast which is more of a test or experience for “liveness”.

I dunno...think you overreached a little on that one Dan?

Here's another good example of some 'resistive sparring' ->

I should have made it clear. When I said:

"That article explains our approach to sparring – going from soft and slow (where you get a chance to actually implement the bunkai you’ve learned) to hard and fast which is more of a test or experience for “liveness”."

I was not intending to imply that the video showed all elements of that approach. The video is titled "soft sparring" after all.

I presume that this is Ed's point.

Other than that, the gif is quite illustrative of hard and fast randori!

Quote:I just don't understand why someone needs to spend two years before they can test what they have learned. I have yet to hear what I would consider a valid reason for this.

Firstly, they should "test" themselves in more limited sparring from day one. More on that in a minute.

As to free sparring, the reason for the delay is because you are actually being taught to fight in a very particular way and to use particular techniques. Granted, in many schools they never progress past the basics and only do "faux boxing" which are unconnected to their basics. However we try to develop the use of particular techniques in free sparring, such as deflections. If you just go straight into free sparring you end up doing "your own thing" which doesn't use any of the karate techniques. From a karate perspective you groove habits which are opposite to the ones we are trying to teach (deflect with tenshin/taisabaki - don't just duck, etc.).

Lastly free sparring is not real fighting, no matter how close you and others feel it might be - it is a kind of "dance" no matter how much controlled contact you have. You know when it starts and you know when it going to finish. Karate is not concerned with protracted pre-arranged fights but deals with scenarios like the single punch thrown at you in the car park etc. Our beginners are taught to groove responses to such an attack via limited krav maga style stimulus-response drills. I've had many a beginner student come to me over the years and tell me how, after the first few lessons, someone threw a punch at them in an unprovoked environment. The student has blocked, countered and the "fight" was over. Stimulus-response training has served its purpose - and usually with the type of personality type that wouldn't last a week in a boxing gym because the training doesn't appeal to them.

Ring fighting produces very good fighters, but the shorter stimulus response drill is, in my view, not to be discounted as a means of teaching the "ordinary Joe" something that will serve him well.

You might disagree, but in all my years as a prosecutor I saw many surveillance videos of assaults; the majority related to one or 2 blows maximum (certainly the first one dictated the rest of the following events).

And if you look at my sparring video, regardless of what you think of it, you'll agree that we have a particular way of moving and deflecting/dealing with blows. It takes a long time to learn and develop. Because we spend our sparring in the "hot seat" of the melee range (the toe to toe range) beginners get injured - and cause injuries to others too. So there is a safety aspect to not unleashing them into completely "unrestricted" sparring. We don't favour gloves because we work intensively on the deflection aspect which isn't easy when gloves get in the way.

You probably won't be satisfied with these reasons, but there they are. Please don't attack me on this issue but agree to disagree. I'm too tired and sick tonight to carry on a hefty debate! You asked - so I've tried to answer honestly and reasonably what seems like a legitimate and reasonably polite query.

Quote: Ames,are you saying that free fighting was not a part of karate training before karate came to Japan in the early to mid 1900's?

Medulant: It depends on what you mean by 'free fighting'. But from what I have read, no, sparring was not a usual part of training in many style prior to Karate's going to Japan. That's not to say that there were not those who did practice free sparing, or who engaged in challenge matches. In Goju Ryu, I can say without a doubt that Chojun Miyagi only briefly (for less than year) experiment with free sparring, but eventually rejected it. Today, many ultra tradional Goju dojo's (notably the Meibukan and Jundokan) still do not officially recognize irikumi.

This information comes from articles I've read in the Journal of Asian Martial Arts. I'm no expert on this topic, but certainly this seems to be a viewed held by many, that knockdown sparring was not widespread until after arriving in Japan.

--Chris

_________________________
"Seek not to follow in the footsteps of the men of old; seek what they sought."--Basho

Though you seem very informed on both fields of study, to me you seem to not understand what Karate IS. I heard the same thing in a JKD class that Karate was too stagnate to block a fluid jab or combination. I just smiled as the Sifu showed almost robotic movement to show how Karate is out gunned. He went on to display JKD more fluid counter.

But the key is weather Karate or JKD if you react after the strike you will be too late. You must react to his movement if you don't try to arm block but duck and stomp his knee/thigh or or weave and sweep his front leg. You don't need to block his jab or lean away and raise your elbow to cacth his jab. The whole thing is if you put one art in a corner and say just block you going to get hit. What I try to stress is that we teach self defense not blocking, you use your self to atatck his action in defense of your body.

Of course a age uke won't block a quick jab, mosts times but it will snap the elbow if you stop his motion with a ankle or instep stomp, then pop the elbow as it dangles in the air. My point is (and we practice this in class) bobbing and weaving is a great defensive move against a head attack but it doesn't help any in defending against lower attacks. So having a narrow view of what Karate is doesn't help give a good comparison of the two.

I agree boxing is an easier skill to develope and gives you a good potent base and so, does well in competition/Sports K1,MMA and such. But one of the reason is that 60% of what Karate is, is illegal and some say dangerous to apply in sports.

My comment of dept and precison is more about expectation and purpose rather then accuracy, basic boxers are taught to punch through there target also but more then 6;" a Karateka is taught to punch at different dept pending the target 2" to 4" at the head and deeper or snapping if at the body pending the target.

Boxing is more blunt trama and Karate imho is more like BT and dicing and slicing or knuckle accurpunctor;-).

Quote: But one of the reason is that 60% of what Karate is, is illegal and some say dangerous to apply in sports.

But then, how do you know this 60% will have the intended effect? In other words, how do you practice these 'too dangerous' techniques. Isn't the only way to practice them against a compliant opponent? How do you know what the result of this kind of attack will actually be. Using your example of knee break, how do you know that the knee will be broken? Further, how do you train to use such a technique as precisely as it must be done against a moving, resisting opponent? I myself have been kicked in the knee several times and never had any problems. Not to sound like a UFC nutridder, but watch those first ones again. There are several knee stomps/kicks that do nothing at all. Same with elbows to the back of the neck/spine and so on.

--Chris

Edited by Ames (11/10/0811:37 AM)

_________________________
"Seek not to follow in the footsteps of the men of old; seek what they sought."--Basho

I believe they both have their good points. Boxing has good powerful punches but aims at places that usually have alot of muscle and can cause minimal damage. But i think Karate has more focused techniques that are aimed at vital points on the body. Both can be as effective as eachother if they are performed correctly.

theres no real way of knowing it for sure. but its commen sense that your knee will slow you down if its broken or damaged. or a jab to the throat will cause the chin to tuck and the person to move away from it. we can't practice these things in sparring, but we can practice safer versions that are more forgiving on the partner, as long as we are aware that a small change in the application could have different effects. not say they will for sure do this instead of that, but nothing is 100% in a fight.

boxers spar with protective gear on sometimes as well (just to bring this kind of back to the op) for safety. safety in training is important and any kind of training has to have safety considerations so you can repeat the training over time.

boxers hit heavy bags for training, but they don't hit back, so heavy bag training could be considered a waste of time. how do you know the punches you work on will actualt work against someone who can move with you?

"I myself have been kicked in the knee several times and never had any problems."and i've been punched in the chest and had to have 4 ribs poped back into place. one story isn't can't be used to predict the future or all combat. if you want to use your expirence to help guide your training, then go for it. if you want to use a "one time, at band camp" kind of story to discount a knee stomp, go for it.

"How do you know what the result of this kind of attack will actually be."how do you know the result of a punch to the jaw will be? how many times have you seen a guy get hit in the jaw and not go down compared to how many have actually gone down? you can't know the percentage success of anything really, you can talk about high percentage and low percentage, but who the hell has done the math on that?

if, for example, a hook to the jaw fails to KO your target, you try to hit him again. so, if any one karate attack failed to do its job, can't we throw another too?

I see your point and it's a good one HOw Do we Know that these so called deadly techniques are effective if you can't practice them on others? I mean you can practice RNC, Arm Bars, right hands the chin and take downs, for sure.

And you are right a stop kick to the knee won't have much affect unless you do it when the knee is loaded and at the right angle or better yet when are pulling him on to that knee. The average person won't know the affect of some of deadlier espects of Combat bc they don't practice with intent. But from past experience I've hit guys on the button and dropped them, hit another guy and he only staggered, hit him with fore knuckles in the throat and he grabs his throat hacking, coughing, eyes bugled watering, no defense drops to his knees or barely standing I hate sweeping him stomping him. The same for the kick to the bal%s some drop like a rock other knees buckle and they coming forward, but this same person get kick to the grion and flick his eyes/touched hard you got this wild defenseless motion again.

I think some things is just common sense you upward elbow a guy in the chin & grab his throat and smash his head against the brick wall behind knee him. Guess what when his eyes roll back in his head you can let go and let him fall. Sounds like common sense to me.

You say a strike to the knee don't do damage well it depends if it starts you to buckle and your shirts grabbed and you are pulled into 3-4 punches to chin and temple, swept and stomped on the side of knee into the concret floor. Tell me that a the knee being struck doesn't cause any damage, cripple. Again common sense concret is harder then flesh and knee cartilage.

You shuto a guy on the side of neck and No he doesn't go unconcisous but he drops like he ran into a wall, next time you see him he is wearing a neck brace. Unexpected result not a KO but a TKO he didn't get back up and wearing a brace. Common sense that must have done damage, not what you wanted but damage non the same.

You are right you can't tell unless you experience this, but you won't have many friends and your enemies will not want to fight they will want to shot you now. They feel you used a weapon on them so fair is fair. Somethings you don't want to know.